the horror of captive marine mammals

This documentary shows the life of these animals in captivity.

http://youtu.be/naiegxG1X4M

When I was a kid, we'd take family trips to Sea World and the now-defunct Marineland. I loved it, was fascinated by their size and seeming-gentleness. It was a treat to be so close to them, to almost smell them...and while the joy I experienced there will always be with me, it wasn't until I got older and thought about the situations of these creatures (much like circus animals) that I felt...doesn't seem right.

I'm also surprised that with technology as it is, determining whether or not the wounds were caused by another whale is so difficult?

Anyway...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhGSY2sxwTU

Killer whales - or any other animal - have absolutely no place in being kept in unsuitable enclosure, not even fit for an animal half their size, only to be 'taught' tricks and made to perform on command. This for our perverted pleasure. Whether it's seaworld or circuses - same thing. Why would we even want to watch these animals behaving in an unnatural way is beyond me. Similarly with zoos. Though some of the more reputable ones (which are few and far in between) do provide some valuable conservation research, most are dreadful for the animal. Even some of the best ones. How can anyone think it's absolutely fine to keep animals who roam and run for miles and miles a day in an enclosure they can walk around in a few minutes. Sure, some of these animals are bred in captivity some would say.... So then it's ok to keep them so one can say they saw a 'real' tiger. A shadow of a tiger, o say. Let the children watch documentaries where the animal is shown in it's natural habitat, doing natural things.

Note that I am not against ' proper' zoos or sanctuaries as they can have a purpose. But keeping animals in unfit connditions and making perform is cruel.

In 2006, in a yard at the Bronx Zoo, Happy the elephant took a few steps toward an eight-foot mirror — and lumbered into history.

A researcher had painted a white X on her head, just above the right eye. She couldn’t see it or feel it. What would happen if Happy noticed the mark in the mirror?

It was an experiment to determine if elephants, long known for their intelligence and strong family bonds, were also self-aware. If so, they would join a select group of animals — humans, apes and dolphins — with the ability to see themselves as others might.

Happy was the final hope. Two of her fellow residents of the Bronx Zoo had failed the test.

After being released into the enclosure, Happy walked straight to the mirror, then backed away. She moved in and out of view of her reflection. Soon, Happy’s trunk inched up to the mark, touching the X tentatively as if inspecting a new hairdo. She eventually would touch her head 47 times.

The researchers were thrilled. The team, headed by an Emory University graduate student, Josh Plotnik, published the results in a journal of the National Academy of Sciences.
Video of Happy gazing at herself in the mirror went viral. A book on elephant behavior devoted a chapter to her as the study proved the earth’s largest land animals have a depth previously unknown. Happy was a star.

Six years later, a reporter took a ride into the elephant area of the Bronx Zoo called Wild Asia, which is accessible only by monorail. It’s a rambling, leafy section of terrain where the zoo’s biggest attractions reside: tigers, rhinos and elephants.
It’s the same area where a man was mauled two weeks ago after leaping into a tiger den.

Not far away is the elephant exhibit, where on this day two of them plodded about near a small pond.

“There’s two of our beautiful friends, Patty and Maxine!” chirped a tour guide.

Afterward, he was asked if they were the only elephants at the zoo.
“Yeah,” he said. “Just those two.”
An informal survey of other zoo workers revealed an astonishing fact: Most thought that Patty and Maxine — 40-year-old Asian females and the two other research subjects that failed Plotnik’s self-awareness test in 2006 — comprised the zoo’s full complement of pachyderms.

Happy, one of the most famous elephant in the zoo, if not the nation, had vanished.

‘She should be there; that’s what our records indicate,” said Ashley Byrne, a spokesperson for the animal-rights group PETA, which closely monitors elephants in captivity, including those in The Bronx.

“We do keep track because when a zoo has decided an animal is no longer useful to them, we sometimes see them being sold off to roadside zoos or even canned-hunting facilities.”

A clue was provided by a YouTube video posted on June 8, 2010. It showed Patty and Maxine near their pond. A caption read: “Happy is not here, as she does not ‘get along with’ one of these two.”

Wildlife conservationist and author G.A. Bradshaw noted something similar in her book, “Elephants on the Edge — What Animals Teach Us About Humanity.”

“She has two neighbors who are contemporaries, Patty and Maxine, but the two have formed a fast friendship, leaving Happy something of a third wheel.”

The question of Happy’s circumstances was put to the zoo’s spokesperson, Mary Dixon, who didn’t immediately respond. A closer look at Happy’s life revealed a disturbing secret.

She was born in 1971 in Thailand and captured as an infant. She landed at a zoo in Hawaii for a few months. In 1973, she was shipped off to West Palm Beach, Fla. Four years later, she arrived in The Bronx.

During all that time, she had a constant companion, a male named Grumpy. He was the same age, also from Thailand, and was captured in the same year as Happy — meaning he was probably her brother, cousin or other close relative. He traveled with her to Hawaii and Florida and came to The Bronx with her in 1977.

But in 2002, Grumpy died, the cause of death listed initially as “unknown.”

A follow-up record uncovered by a Swedish elephant authority, Dan Koehl, showed that Grumpy was attacked by Patty and Maxine and “killed after sustaining injuries from being beaten up by [them].”

“It had to be a pretty violent situation,” said Ed Stewart, co-founder of the animal-advocacy group PAWS, which runs an elephant sanctuary in Northern California.

“It’s a tragedy, but things like that just don’t happen in the wild.”

Deaths in captivity are not uncommon.

Another elephant, Tus, died at the Bronx Zoo in 2002 from an unknown cause. The passing of Grumpy and Tus went unreported in the press.

Happy — approaching middle age at 31 in 2002 — was left to herself.

The zoo found Happy a new companion. Sammy, a male young enough to be her son, was introduced and the two hit it off. The handlers were encouraged.

Four years later, when Plotnik launched his study, he took note of how well Happy and Sammy got along.

“They had a very good relationship,” he told The Post. “Just as Patty and Maxine had a very good relationship.

“But the two groups stayed away from each other. I never saw them mixing — and I was there for months.”

Happy’s luck didn’t last. Shortly after Plotnik’s research concluded, Sammy passed away from liver disease. Happy was alone again.
Plotnik’s study of elephants shamed many zoos. After its publication, the Bronx Zoo announced it would close its elephant exhibit after any of its three remaining elephants died.
And it would take on no new animals until that time.

The announcement was considered a bold move — elephants have long been among the most popular among visitors, and their loss could hurt revenue.

But it was applauded by conservationists and behavioral scientists, who believe elephants should be left in the wild or kept in sanctuaries, where they have significantly more room than zoos can provide.

It also intensified the scrutiny of the conditions of elephants at zoos.
In The Bronx, a team of caretakers must constantly work on the feet of Happy, Maxine and Patty, scrubbing the pads and filing down their nails — something not necessary in the wild, where elephants walk as much as 30 miles per day.

Without that care, they likely would develop foot or joint problems, a common cause of death for zoo and circus elephants.

Happy’s mental state was another matter.

“If that animal is all alone, that would be extremely stressful,” said Byrne.

“Elephants have close family dynamics, and interaction is essential to their well-being.”
Observers worry that Happy, forced to live in proximity to two alpha females who killed her lifelong companion, could slide into despair, something that has occurred at other facilities

So the zoo went against its vow — and brought in another elephant to keep her company, according to a zoo handler.

But the new arrival, a young male named Jumbo whose mother passed away at another location, was adopted by Patty and Maxine. The gamble backfired.

Happy spends most of her time indoors in a large holding facility lined with elephant cages, which are about twice the length of the animals’ bodies. The public never sees this.
On Sept. 22, after Post inquiries, Happy was finally spotted. She’d been put in the elephant exhibit — alone — while Patty and Maxine appeared mostly out of view in a separate enclosure on the opposite side of the monorail.

In a written statement, Dixon claimed Happy was out in public “regularly.”

“Rotating animals through exhibits is part of our behavioral-enrichment efforts,” she wrote. “I am not sure, but she may even be out tomorrow. When not on exhibit, they still have time outside.”

Advocates are pushing the Bronx Zoo to fulfill its promise to shut down the elephant exhibit.

“They should do it now and send those elephants to a sanctuary,” said Byrne of PETA, which has been pressing the matter with the Wildlife Conservation Society, which owns the zoo.

But acting right now would be a financial risk.

“Zoos are concerned about a domino effect,” said animal advocate Stewart.

“Next year it’s polar bears, then grizzly bears, though Detroit got rid of their elephants and attendance is better than ever.”

Besides the potential loss of visitors, several obstacles must be overcome.
The zoo would have to find a suitable location, though there are two likely places: PAWS in California, where eight animals live on 115 acres, and the Elephant Sanctuary in Hohenwald, Tenn., which has 14 pachyderms and more than 2,000 acres.

Stewart estimated the cost of building three crates for the trio and trucking them to Tennessee at about $80,000.

“It’s quite a bit harder moving elephants that don’t travel that often — it’s stressful for them and it takes conditioning. You have to take precautions.

“And you worry about their health. They’d have to be quarantined for tuberculosis for a time. Putting a new elephant into a group that’s been together for a while is a risk. Climate is an issue, but if they’re in New York, they should be fine going anywhere.”

He thought transferring Happy, Patty and Maxine would be great for them — and not overly difficult to pull off.

The good news?

“Some of the most social elephants are the ones that were alone.”
Plotnik hopes for the best for his research darling — and saddened to hear of her circumstances. If Happy truly has a sense of self, she may also know loneliness.

“Elephants should not be kept isolated,” he said. “Their social welfare is a priority.”

http://m.nypost.com/p/news/local/bronx/ ... HAB0HUIllN

cincybearcat wrote:

How do you feel about pets?

:shock:
:think:

Jason P wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

How do you feel about pets?

:shock:
:think:

It's a good question, one that made me think. There's a difference, in that had we not adopted our cats, they'd likely have been euthanized or left to live on the streets. With us, they're fed, safe, loved, played with, have toys, have eachother.

Sure I'm entertained when George jumps three feet in the air to catch "Da Bird", but HE loves it. My enjoyment in watching him is just gravy

hedonist wrote:

It's a good question, one that made me think. There's a difference, in that had we not adopted our cats, they'd likely have been euthanized or left to live on the streets. With us, they're fed, safe, loved, played with, have toys, have eachother.

Sure I'm entertained when George jumps three feet in the air to catch "Da Bird", but HE loves it. My enjoyment in watching him is just gravy

It's all how we justify it. It sounds like your cats are lucky. But some people mistreat their pets. Just like some zoos are better then others.

It did make me think. I'm sure someone could be for animal rights and are anti-zoo and hypocritically own a Jack Russel Terrier or an Australian Shepard inside a city and not even think twice about that those breeds require lots of space and exercise that a city cannot provide.

Shouldn't packs of dogs be running around wild like wolves? Since humans have been able to successfully domestic them by training them with treats, it's OK to not make comparisons to "large" mammals?

Is the only reason that wolves are not pets is because human have not been able to successfully domestic them on a consistent basis?

And cats are part of the felidae family. People freak out about a tiger in a zoo ... and then have a de-clawed inside-house kitty at home. Cats that grow up in the wild are not meant to be indoors ... but if trained from birth to be domesticated, it's OK.

Interesting thoughts for me to chew on.

One can't really compare a wild animal to a domesticated one. Domestication is 'in the genes' and is an evolutionary process (facilitated by man, obviously). It's not a question of being born in captivity or, for example, a feral cat having kittens in your house. Even if you decide to keep those kittens, they will be feral. It takes generations upon generations upon generations, selective breeding, etc. before a species can be considered domesticated. So many different 'conditions' need to be met for this. Very, very few wild species can be domesticated. Note that a tame animal is not the same as a domestic one.

Even for domesticated animals, whether your cat, dog or budgie or the farm animal, they need to be kept in an environment suited to their species allowing them to follow their natural instincts, and need to be cared for properly. Too many people that own animals really should not.

On a note for Jason ref should dogs run wild in packs like wolves (or any other animal with similar domesticated/wild counterparts).... part of the domestication process alters their social behaviour and, what would seem logical social interaction for a wild animal is no longer a requirement for the domesticated one.

cincybearcat wrote:

redrock wrote:

One can't really compare a wild animal to a domesticated one. Domestication is 'in the genes' and is an evolutionary process (facilitated by man, obviously). It's not a question of being born in captivity or, for example, a feral cat having kittens in your house. Even if you decide to keep those kittens, they will be feral.

Interesting...a few questions

So, is it wrong to keep feral cats?

And, how is animals being born into captivity, and then their offspring being born into captivity, etc different from domesticating animals of the past?

I believe it is wrong to keep feral cats as a pet. I know people who have a farm and some feral cats live there (sort of) but they are not 'pets'.

Because domestication doesn't happen as quickly as that and it is not a natural process (ie many generations of offspring being born into captivity). Selective breeding, culling, etc. all play a part in this process. They may become 'tame' (ie accepting human contact/interaction) but will not be domesticated (a genetic evolution). As I mentioned in the previous post, so many different criteria need to be met (from a biological and social point of view) for an animal having any chance of being domesticated that only a handful of wild animals can be. It is a huge evolutionary upheaval for the species.

My daughter is studying wildlife conservation and recently wrote a biology paper on this subject. As I'm into this as well, I usually read her research, books, etc. It is quite complex but very interesting - very eye opening too.

But then we all view animals differently. I like seeing the urban foxes in my neighbourhood, others kill them. Some people don't care about animal welfare thinking one needs to look after humans first, some do. Personally, I find things like circuses and seaworld revolting.

frickin sad ass people. i love a reptile house at a zoo but i know it is very wrong and it makes me very sad. i've never been to a marine animal park. i have been to a few zoos and they are huge and disappointing. at the end of the day people suck.